big giant circles

can you dig up the "judges decisions" thread? i don't believe i've heard this one before, and i'm sure the other judges gave some good things that could help your mix fit better in compliance with site remix prerequisites. as for your mix in current condition, unsung plumber summed it up pretty short-and-sweetly. you've got some pretty great sounds in your mix at this point, but this is one of those tracks that's more of "an upgrade in sound quality via better samples/soundfonts". we don't just look for the original tracks beefed up with better instruments playing the exact same source music. we like for you to be at the helm of your mix, and expand on the original music a little more, not just improve the sound quality. you've got a good base here, and this is an awesome source tune. just try not to make it such a verbatim comparison to the original theme and you'd be gold.

Source - SPC - 06 Sewerage Wow, this is loud. Pretty consistent clipping throughout... Not sure if we wanna require tweakage on that in the event this is passed. Well, right off the bat, this has some great energy, and in the spirit of "Sewerage" pretty darn fun to listen to. Just by the sound, I can guess that you probably had a lot of fun making this tune (I hope so anyway). Very TMNTish indeed. I'll admit the synthetic guitar bugged me a wee bit, but not to any substantial degree. I especially enjoyed the funky shuffle switch-up at :51. Solo at 2:06 showed good sequencing and definitely did a great job keeping the energy flowing. Drumwork was solid throughout. Haha, and then ending, with the cross-panned dialogue was amusing. I really think this is a great example of mix personalization. Though the theme isn't all that different from what the source conveys, there's plenty of expansion upon the original. I'd personally like to get a render that's just a couple notches down the volume slider before this one is go, should the rest of the vote follow mine. YES As far as the title goes, I personally don't think "Wasteboarding" and "Waste Water Wipeout" are too similar, but it's your call, so I suppose "Turd Surfing" it is...

Source - SPC track 24 Close to Home *EDIT* larry is a foo *MOAR EDIT* k, time for an actual vote. very pretty source tune, and your mix follows suit. ok, i've listened to this one numerous times over the past few days, and i've been fairly on-the-fence about it. ultimately, what it comes down to is this kind of replicates the original almost to a fault. almost. that's not my biggest hangup. while it could use a little bit more in the way of counter-melodic support and additional partwriting, it's the production that holds the beef of my beef. there's some dynamic variance, yes, but there's not much of a FULL sound to be heard anywhere in here. definitely needs more low-end support. the low strings around :28 were really really hollow and then. then around :45, the upper register instruments have some nice crescendo action going on, but they just leave the lower instruments high and dry. clean up the production (mixing) and perhaps find a way to fill in the low end in some way, and this would be in YES territory as far as I'm concerned. RESUBMIT NO

you're probably right. i rarely do anything in a timely fashion.

This one's all over the place it seems. I guess I'll review from left to right. Starts off pretty cool, nice ambient textures and fleeting tones. It kicks off a little slower than I think it should have the synth that chimes in at 1:00 didn't do so well and probably could have been subbed for a different instrument, or else reworked entirely. I liked the synth at 1:08, and this it's wide-panned opposite at about 1:23. The trance synth at 1:15 didn't really bother me, but I think you could have applied some tasteful filtering. From 1:15 to 1:38 where the full mix finally does drop seemed a little empty. I thought there definitely could have been a stronger build. I'm not sure I'm a big fan of the guitar lead... It doesn't really seem to bring much energy or compliment the rest of the tonality you've established at that point. The drums DEFINITELY need to be brought out. They're hiding behind everything else as it stands now. The guitar at 2:15 widely panned also to the right, just didn't work. Sounded out of tune, and out of place. Again, from 2:00 to 2:30 there just wasn't enough meat on the bone, so to speak. What happened after 2:30? It's like when you have your CD player going in one room, the TV in the other, the radio in another, and winamp running on your PC and you're trying to concentrate on just one of them. Definitely need to clean that up. All in all, despite several opportunities for improvement, this isn't a bad first submission, Sean. While it's a little apparent that you are in fact new to Reason, you also show some potential, and I'm sure with a little practice, you can be remixing like a pro, so definitely keep at it. And when you're a little more adept, I wouldn't mind hearing a resubmission of this track down the road. Just be sure to get some good feedback and insight from the WIP forums or #ocrwip channel first. Good luck on this and future projects and submissions! NO

Just can't compare to great classics like "Ice Cap Hurts"...

lol, nice.

This is borderline a cover... intro, melody, progression, not to much deviation from the source, and that's probably going to be the biggest hangup i'm going to have with the track. You're right, this is and definitely has potential to be a great chill track. Unfortunately, you're going to have to implement some more ideas into the song structurally. For what it's truly worth, I didn't feel you tried to do anything really expressive or different with the sax until 3:39, where you put a little bit of personalization into the melody. I wish there'd been more of that. The performance of the sax wasn't bad, but it definitely could have been bolder. Mix-wise, the sax was a little on the quiet side, on top of the fact that you seemed to play with reserves. You can still belt out a melody without disrupting a track's "chill qualities". Also, the soundscape throughout seemed a little thin... not sure if there's one prominent reason; I think it was the combination of several small factors. Like, the drums were really dry, which wouldn't have been so bad if the supporting pads hadn't been so far behind the xylophone/marimba/vibes. The flute seemed a little too rigid, as well. At any rate, I encourage you to branch out a little more, and take the melody by the horns and don't be afraid to throw a little more improvisation into your performance. Beyond that, perhaps run the final mixdown by a few people to see if someone can offer some good insight to make sure everything is going to blend well in the big picture. Keep at it. NO

whoops, happens to the best of us.

I just signed up! Thought some of you might be interested in this: http://www.google.com/tisp/press.html Here's the install guide: http://www.google.com/tisp/install.html Enjoy!

And as we wander in the cold This ice is freezing off our toes But here's a mix you oughtta know And all the judges won't say "NO" We'll bob our heads here in the snow Till we can't DJP no mo' And we will carve our names in stone We rock the mix--ice cap zone

the answer is none. at least, permanently. doesn't matter what the circumstances, or what the website. people will always get curious again at some point. disclaimer: this post is a grammatic nightmare.

Pretty nice full orchestra sound throughout. I gotta be honest, the percussion that kicked in at :26 was pretty terrible... both thin and dry as a cracker, and therefore extremely out of place among it's more meaty counterparts. almost sounded like a metronome that was left on in the final render. Especially as the orchestrations pick up additional weight. This is a definite upgrade in overall instrument quality. I have to agree with LT that the overall deviation from "Fuse" is just a tad close-to-home. In fact, the misfit percussion previously mentioned is probably a result of trying too hard to emulate the exact part in "fuse" itself. And other than the fact that the key is different, melodically it's still pretty darn verbatim. Not that I'm opposed to repeating a riff closely; I think that's perfectly acceptable as long as you don't overdo it, or get to the point where your track relies mostly on the upgraded instrumentation. That's definitely an OCR quirk. I like your track, and I hate to make calls like this... it happens more frequently than I'd like, but on the precept of rejecting other great tracks on account of being too similar to their source tunes, I'm going to make the same judgment here. This could definitely be a pretty easy resub. NO

Props in creativity. I disagree that the organ is arguably too soft, it is MOST DEFINITELY too soft. Were I listening to this in my car, I'm pretty sure all I would have heard is 4+ minutes worth of way-too-repetitive drum loop. Melody is pretty much a copy paste kind of job in terms of arrangement. (That is, it's pretty muc exactly the same) in a different key, of course. Wasn't really grooving to well to this, because it's way too underdeveloped at this point. The only real expansion after more listens was the incorporation of the source into a different genre. Other than that, the mix is extremely lackluster. Too much reverb and repetition of the drum loop. Poor mixing and balance of the instrumentation. Perhaps give the WIP boards or #ocrwip some consideration in future projects, Danny. Good luck on your future stuff. NO

Well, I YES'd the first one, so let's see what's been done here. Obvious reference to lower norfair from :10 - :32 I could be mistaken, but I believe the strings that fade in after :32 are a loose reference to the underlying string riff in "Those Chosen..." and source from :38 - :50 (pads) seems to have a loosely interpreted connection to :43 - 1:04 in remix. 1:05 - 1:25 expands on the overall theme with some original melodic content, as far as I can tell with a beautiful very Gladiatorly chord progression. 1:26 - 1:45 begins reference to the main norfair melody, which kicks in fully from 1:49 - 2:32 2:32 - 2:45 adds some good dynamic variety to break up the potential overuse of the "Zimmer drums" and the bells add some good timbral diversity as well. 2:45 - 3:17 seemed to be mostly original stuff. The traditional "Zimmer build" at 3:18 introduces the melody of "Those Chosen" in the form of the strings which start their crecendo at 3:30 and bust wide open and obvious at 3:49 and then the song halts at 4:11. Now for the "lightning round" -Samples are great and used well -Good dynamic diversity -Only production gripe was the master volume - needs to be louder -Obvious integration and decent interpretation of sources -Good original additions and expansions within mix -I thought the ending could have been a little less abrupt -Repetition was not as much an issue in this version, due to the cut length. YES could we see about getting a re-render that's a couple decibels louder?

I normally stay out of debates like this, but I'll just say to Suz, Snapple, Roe, and anyone else who has produced some great stuff, or is otherwise leaving on similar terms, I'm really sorry to see y'all go... I can't say I wholly approve of the manner in which you're going about it, but I respect your decisions regardless. I'll simply say my peace by wishing you well, and good luck in your future projects and endeavors. My greatest regret, as one of the newest judges and someone who generally doesn't participate in the OCR community via the public forums, I sincerely apologize that we the panel, but myself in particular, couldn't serve any of you any better...

there is no way any of you can be serious. *sigh*

Not bad. I kind of enjoy the opening synthwork. The fill at :58 sounded kind of... bleh. Just sounded really messy. Seems to kick into "autopilot mode" shortly after. Especially when the melody kicks in fully at about 1:28. 1:58 kind of goes back to the opening vibe, what with the pedaled bass note and all. The 3rd note of the actual Ice Cap riff seems like theres some bad notes clashing with each other in the arrangement. Doesn't leave a pleasant taste in the ears. I guess after hearing this song so much recently, one could say my senses have become "recapitated" That is to say, this track has received a lot of love. And just like Valentine's day, when the standard gets set to a certain point, it's never good to buy your gal a Diamond necklace one year, and then get her a generic card and some sampler chocolates the next year. Basically, this track has some strong remixes to live up to. Would have been gold in 2000-2002. Not a bad sub, but not quite up to OCR-par. NO On a separate note, perhaps someone should start an OCR2000 site, where all the mixes that "would have made it back then" could rest.

I can only speak for myself too, but this is probably the 4th or 5th time I've ever even looked in here. So no, I've never really done remixes from this forum. I think it's fine to have a request forum, but for the most part, there's little motivation for me to come in and look at a stranger's post who wants a remix of a track from a game that I don't even know, usually. I think it'd be more effective to approach an individual personally and present a source to them, and simply ask if they'd be interested in doing it for you. Not that it'd be a guarantee they'd do it, due to time constraints, obligations, etc, but it's more personal, and more flattering, and thus more likely IMO to get your track mixed.

I'm glad you finally came around, bro. Take it easy.

I'm just not sure. Your guess is as good as mine at this point. Suz - masturbatory ego stroking rawfl i'll be sure to use that phrase in a future vote.

dude. what. the. hell. learn to take criticism. shit man.

Indeed. I'm trying to figure out what the hell you yourself just said. And apparently I'm the first person you've ever come across that's typed out a grammatic error. I wish you luck in the realization that it'll probably happen many, many, many times again in the future. Not only with me, but plenty of other people. As far as your song, I'm not sure if you're being serious, or even how to make complete sense of your response, so I'm not really sure what kind of a reply to give to what you just said. If you're trying to belittle me or what I said, then whatever. If you're just making jokes in good fun, then cool. As far as your track is concerned, as not only a judge but a fellow musician (whether or not I listen to extensive amounts of hip hop or not), I'm just simply telling you why you're track is not very good at this point, and some measures that might be taken to help it out at this point. Do what you will with that information. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, either way. And again, whether it "qualifies" or not, I repeat myself:

I bet it's going to be hard to find a sample that's exactly what you're looking for. I think your best bet would be to get one that's close (yeah, taikos are good) and just tweak the sample. (Envelopes, pitch, reverb, etc)

kill u .